Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Timothy 4

Now the Spirit speaks expressly.—Rather, But the Spirit. But (de) in very strong contrast to the sublime mystery of Redemption that St. Paul has been speaking of as the glorious treasure contained in the Church of which Timothy and his colleagues were ministers. But in spite of that sublime truth which should occupy the thoughts and fill the hearts of Christians, men will busy themselves with other and very different things; with a spurious mock devotion, dreaming that God’s mercy and love were to be purchased by mere abstinence from certain meats, or by an unnatural renunciation of the home and family life.

The “words of the Spirit” here allude to a mysterious power, to a divine gift, traces of which occur again and again in the New Testament pages. Among the supernatural signs which were granted to the first generation of believers, and with very rare exceptions only to the first generation—to men and women, many, if not most, of whom had seen Jesus and had personal contact with Him—must be counted those mysterious intimations of the will of the Holy Spirit which guided and encouraged the Church of the first days.

That intimation came in varied forms: to the Twelve in the form of fiery tongues (Acts 2:1–12); to a more numerous company (Acts 4:31); to Peter on the occasion of the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:10–16; Acts 10:19–20); to St. Paul on three occasions in the course of his second missionary journey (Acts 16:6–7; Acts 16:9–10); through the medium of the prophet Agabus (Acts 21:11). St. Paul alludes to many such voices of the Spirit, and heavenly intimations, when speaking to the elders of Miletus (Acts 20:23). One of these special revelations, made to himself, he here quotes.

In the latter times.—This refers to all those ages that follow the coming of the Lord. Paul lived in these times, and we are still watching the slow and solemn march of these latter ages. The errors foreseen then have, more or less, affected the internal government of the Church during the eighteen hundred years that have passed since St. Paul’s words were written. In no age, perhaps, have they been more ostentatiously thrust forward than in our own.

Some shall depart from the faith.—“By denying what is true, by adding what is false,” says Bengel.

Giving heed to seducing spirits.—This expression must not be watered down by explanations which understand this expression as referring to false teachers. The “seducing spirits” are none other than evil powers and spirits subject to Satan, and which are permitted to influence and to work in human hearts. (Ephesians 6:12—passages in which these spiritual communities of wickedness and their powers over men are again alluded to by St. Paul.)

Doctrines of devils.—Doctrines and thoughts taught by, suggested by, evil spirits. The personality of these unhappy beings is clearly taught by St. Paul. Regarding their influence in the pagan world and their antagonism to Christ and His followers, see 1 Corinthians 10:20–21.

Speaking lies in hypocrisy.—The Greek words here should be translated, through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies. The lies that these men utter refer to their teaching that it was pleasing to the eye of the All-seeing Creator for men and women to avoid certain foods and to abstain from marriage. Their hypocrisy consisted in their assumption of a mask of holiness, which holiness they considered was derived from their false asceticism and their abstinence from things which the Apostle proceeded to show were lawful.

Having their conscience seared with a hot iron.—Better rendered, Branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron. The image is drawn from the practice of branding slaves and certain criminals on their forehead with a mark. “Qua nota turpitudinis non inusta tua vita est?” (Cic. Cat. i. 6.)

These men tried to teach the efficacy of a substitution of certain counsels of perfection in place of a faithful, loving life. They based their teaching on wild Eastern speculations about the evil nature of all matter. They were often themselves evil-livers, who, conscious of their own stained, scarred lives, strove with a show of outward sanctity and hypocritical self-denial to beguile and to lead astray others, and in the end to make them as vile as themselves.

Forbidding to marry.—This strange and unnatural “counsel of perfection,” St. Paul, thinking and writing in the Spirit, foresaw as a perilous delusion that would, as time went on, grow into the impious dogma of certain of the great Gnostic schools. This teaching was probably, even in those early days, creeping into the churches. The Jewish sects of Essenes and Therapeutae had already taught that “abstinence from marriage” was meritorious.

Men belonging to these sects doubtless were to be found in every populous centre where Jews congregated, and it was always in these centres of Judaism that Christianity at first found a home. St. Paul, however, saw no reason to dwell on this point at any length; the gross absurdity of such a “counsel” as a rule of life was too apparent; it was a plain contradiction of the order of Divine Providence. But the next question which presented itself in the teaching of these false ascetics, as we shall see, required more careful handling.

And commanding to abstain from meats.—Once more we must look to those famous Jewish religious communities of Egypt (the Essenes and Therapeutae), the precursors of the great monastic systems of Christianity, as the home from which these perverted ascetic tendencies issued. These precepts too, like the counsel respecting marriage, were adopted in later years by several of the principal Gnostic sects; and it was especially those times St. Paul foresaw, although, no doubt, the seeds of their false asceticism had already been sown broadcast in the principal Christian congregations.

It has been asked why, in these solemn warnings against a false asceticism which St. Paul foresaw might and would be substituted for a truly earnest God-fearing life, the question of celibacy was dismissed with one short sentence, while the apparently less-important question of abstaining from particular kinds of food was discussed in some detail. The reason is easily discoverable. The counsel to abstain from marriage was a strange and unnatural suggestion, one contrary to the plain scheme of creation.

Any teaching that taught that the celibate’s life was a life especially pleasing to God would, at the same time, throw a slur upon all home and family life, and the Apostle felt that men’s ordinary common sense would soon relegate any such strange teaching to obscurity. But the question of abstaining from meats—that was connected with the precepts of the Mosaic law, which dealt at some length (probably for reasons connected with public health) with these restrictions regarding meats.

These false teachers, while they urged such abstinence as a likely way to win God’s favour, would probably base, or in any case support, their arguments by reference to certain portions of the Mosaic law, whether rightly understood or wrongly understood.

These points, then, might have developed into a significant controversial question between the (Pauline) Gentile and the Jewish congregations. So St. Paul immediately moved it to a higher platform. All food was from the hand of one Maker—therefore, nothing could truly be considered common or unclean without throwing a slur upon the All-Creator.

Which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving.—God’s primeval intention is thus sharply contrasted with men’s arbitrary restrictions. This divine intention is repeated with still greater emphasis in 1 Timothy 4:4.

Of them which believe and know the truth.—The true “Gnostics,” in St. Paul’s eyes, were not those self-sufficient men who, from their own corrupt imagination, were devising these strange and unnatural methods of pleasing God, but those holy, humble men of heart who believed in His crucified Son and knew the truth of the glorious gospel.

For every creature of God is good.—To teach that anything created was unclean would be an insult to the Creator. The very fact of its being His creation is enough. If made by God, then it must be good.

And nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving.—Every kind of food and drink may become hateful in the eyes of the all-pure God if misused, if partaken of without any sense of gratitude to the Divine giver. But nothing which can be made use of as food ought to be regarded as unclean or as polluted. Every kind of food is intended for man. The only condition is that whatever is partaken of should be gratefully received by him as a gift.

For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.—Not only are all created things to be considered pure and not to be dismissed lightly, but in the sight of God, “every creature” is holy when received as His gift with thanksgiving and prayer—such thanksgiving-prayer containing thoughts in exact accordance with the Spirit of God revealed in Scripture.

Thus, all food is sanctified, not only, or even chiefly, by the common formula of a Christian grace before meals. This practice too often degenerates into a mere form of words—into lip-service of the most heartless kind—and is too often regarded as a kind of religious charm. The sanctification to which St. Paul refers belongs to no single prayer or grace, but to the constant habit of referring everything to God as the giver of all—to the perpetual 'office' of a devout heart, which, taking everything as a gift from God, the lover and friend of humankind, continually thanks God from the heart.

One, if not the oldest, form of a Christian grace before meals is the one found in the Apostolic Constitutions. It is very simple and beautiful, and perhaps not too long for daily use. It runs as follows: “Blessed are You, O Lord, who nourish humankind from their earliest youth, who give food to all flesh; fill our hearts with joy and gladness, so that we, always enjoying sufficiency, may abound in every good work in Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom glory, honor, and power be ascribed to You for all ages. Amen.”